Ok, what I meant was that it is more logical for engine power to be RELATED to a ships mass than its volume or size. Therefore my take on it that the mass of the ship is correct but the volume can vary.
One good example might be the hangar that has a mass of 1050 tonnes and and can store up to 1000 tonnes of craft. I take it that it literally means 1000t of craft but most craft stored need extra space for service and such and so these craft are much more compact in their design to fit into that area and 1050 tonnes of hangar can be pretty huge. But then you get in trouble when you figure out how much armour a ship has because that is also calculated on the ships HS so in any way you twist and turn it can never be right.
My comment on gravity was in relation to how you can sense it. The game mechanic act as if sensors and communications are instant and that was only what I meant by feeling the gravitation of mass in an instant as a future technology versus sending out a pulse to scan a body of volume.
And as I said... you can view it any way you wish... I doubt there is a correct way of viewing it. Engine power might represent an energy field surrounding or warping space around the ship which might have more to do with its size than mass, you can make it mean pretty much anything.
As far as I know and if I remember correctly HS is neither Mass or Volume according to Steve. It is something in between, a way to fit the pieces in to the puzzle so to speak.
Personally I would prefer if all equipment had both a mass and volume trait instead of HS. In this way a ships size versus mass could give ships different traits. Such as smaller ship being able to handle faster speeds better becasue they will not tend to break appart when applying thrusters to turn around or simply accelerate (if that is what they do). There could also be benefits and drawbacks of size versus weight ratio on ships.
